HOW DID I GET HERE:  Do I Really Want to Continue?

Late Monday, March 3, 2014, I file as a Democratic candidate for State House in Montana.  I have been convinced by the Field Director, Montana Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee, that my name is needed on the ballot in November.  All it takes is completing a form from the web, emailing it back to the Office of Secretary of State, and include a $15 filing fee.  Too easy.  Then comes the request for a completion of two more forms.  Impatient but resigned, I finish them in due course.

It's Thursday morning and the sky hasn't fallen -- yet.

I find two official-looking pieces of mail in my box.  The first is from the Secretary of State, confirming that indeed I am now a candidate running for statewide office.  I turn to the second one with a return stamp, officious "MONTANA" in red on the top line and, in smaller print below, "Family Institute".  Uh-oh.  Is it what I think?  I really don't want to know but I must open it anyway.

My heart drops to my stomach when I quickly review the letter and enclosed survey.  As I suspected, this survey reflects issues propounded by the right wing.  Statements are framed according to how they see the world.  Topics range from schools (funding of public schools, allowing charter schools and home schools and state regulation) and healthcare (Medicaid, "domestic partners", companies opting out of Obamacare, abortion) to issues around "homosexuals" and sexual orientation.  It ends with three statements about taxes, one statement about the 2nd Amendment (firearms) and the last statement about global warming and increased regulation.

As is typical of right-wing thought (everything is either black or white), the greatest percentage of statements begin with shoulds:  "should allow, should be allowed, should be prohibited, should be expanded, should be amended" (reminds me of our parents telling us children what we "should" do when we were little).

Examples of statements include (responses graduate from Strongly Support to Strongly Oppose):  "Abortion should be prohibited in all circumstances";  "Abortion should be prohibited, except in cases of rape, incest, or when the life of the mother is in danger".  Nowhere is there a statement about a decision concerning pregnancy being made between a woman and her doctor; only that "abortion should be prohibited..."  Two other examples are:  "Homosexuals should be allowed to adopt children"and "Anti-discrimination laws should be expanded to protect sexual orientation in the same way that race, creed, nationality, and religion are protected".  Nowhere is there an understanding that (1) children thrive in homes where there are warm and loving adults whether they are both male, both female or one of each, and (2) judging discrimination according to who people love is still discrimination.  What difference does it make to any other individual who loves who?!

Government intrusion?  In spades!

Oh, and if I choose not to complete the survey?  This organization tells me they will go back into voting records, public statements I've made, voter guides and my party's platform to find answers.  So be it.

But a groan escapes.  Do I really want to put myself through this?